Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Second substitute HB 343 on agency review fails amid concerns about 'timely' definition and enforcement
Summary
HB 343, which would have allowed applicants to seek relief when state agencies take excessive time to process applications and could require fee refunds, failed on the House floor after members questioned the absence of defined time frames and possible unintended consequences for agencies.
A proposal to create a process for applicants to seek relief when state agencies take an excessive time to process applications failed on the House floor Feb. 26.
Representative Chad Bingham introduced second substitute HB 343, saying it would allow an aggrieved applicant to request review by the Administrative Rules and Regulatory Permits Review Committee and could trigger a refund of permit fees if agencies were found to have taken an excessive period.
Members raised several concerns: the bill contains no fixed definition of what constitutes a ‘timely’ review and would leave that standard to later rulemaking or committee review, resource limitations at agencies (for example, staffing and legal-review bottlenecks), and the possibility that agencies could evade substantive review simply by refunding fees. Supporters said the measure was intended to add accountability without intruding on the substantive permit decision; critics said it risked perverse incentives.
After debate the House recorded that the bill failed to pass and would be filed, according to the transcript.
